Certification Discussion Group: “Taking Names”!

Some of you know that I run a 7 part series on certification strategies and methodologies that helped me submit my portfolio to the Board for Certification of Genealogists (BCG) in 2016.  I am again “taking names” of those who are interested in learning more (no commitment implied) about the series.  The goals are two-fold: demystifying the process and increasing your knowledge so you submit your portfolio smarter! There are no perquisites, other than wanting to know more about the portfolio process. No part of this program is sanctioned by BCG, but they have encouraged me to continue.

I run two groups of 14 each, once a quarter–a session in the morning and one at night. These are 100% online (Google HangOuts). We cover the application process, the seven elements and the “aftermath.” Some say there are two types of portfolio submissions: those who think they are ready and the “over-readies.” By demystifying the process I believe all attendees will identify when they are ready to start the process and strategies for submission.

I started this group because the state of Washington had the fewest number of Certified Genealogists(R) per 1 million population than any state that had them (6 states had no CGs.) (See blog post here.) I felt some of it was a lack of knowledge about certification, but some of it was because it seemed like too big of a hurdle to people who were already very well prepared. Because of that interest in increasing our total CGs to greater than two (!), there is a preference given in placement and cost to those that are Seattle Genealogical Society members (the platform I use)  and WA residents, but generally 1/2 of the class is from out of state.

If you are interested in being placed on the list, just email me at jkmorelli@gmail.com with your interest. Any other indication of interest will be ignored (PM on FB, reply to this post etc.).

Next class series will run in Oct/Nov. and another will probably run in February/March.

Happy Hunting!


What I have been doing since the last posting: I have been working on a long blog post on DNA and the portfolio.  It will come out in a week or so. I am preparing to present at 3 more conferences this year in Mpls., Pittsburgh, and Arlington (WA) and have already traveled to two–Jamboree (CA) and Ohio GS. Each takes a bit of prep! I also just got accepted for Ohio again next year for two new ones. Yeah.  Looking forward to a quiet fall (except we are traveling out of the country!)

[1} “on the clock” photograph by Jill Morelli, taken at The Boston Antheneum, 15 June 2017. (I post a photo of clock whenever the post is about being “on the clock.” Schmaltzy, of course.)

Certified Genealogist is a registered trademark and the designation CG is a service mark of the Board for Certification of Genealogists®, used under license by Board certificants who meet competency standards.

My Foray into African American Research

Boarding the trainWhile at the Ohio State Genealogical Conference a couple of weeks ago, I had the opportunity to attend multiple presentations on African American topics. I wanted to learn more about the records and their availability, but my desire to learn wasn’t just driven by my genealogical interests. African American history is also a part of my history as a white person.

I am part Swedish. Swedish records start in the mid 1900’s and extend in an unbroken line back to the late 1600s. One of my ancestors has a calculated birth date of 1595. The stark contrast of the continuity of Swedish records and those of African Americans is not lost on me. African American genealogists speak of the “the wall” of Emancipation. This wall is not like the white genealogist’s “brick wall,” which is often one that is more of a “high threshold.” The “wall” of Emancipation is real—there is a serious lack of records for a people who were, in the minds of their masters, working animals. Even if the slave adopted a surname, a critical identifier for a genealogist, it was informal, sometimes changed and not recorded until after Emancipation. Nor could they marry, another record type that appears after Emancipation.

And, no, slaves didn’t usually accept the name of the master upon Emancipation and if they did, they might change it some years later.

I am working with an African American family now where it was stunningly simple to trace them back to 1867, up to “the wall”. The family resided in a single county in Texas coninuously. Atypically, the family did adopt the surname of their master, and kept that name continuously. They defied the norms of African American research up to the point of where I, too, hit the wall of Emancipation.

The records which exist after Emancipation tell a skimpy story about the slave life of Ben, the slave ancestor of my client.[1] The master moved from Tennessee to Texas around 1846. Ben was born in Virginia between 1832 and 1838, but it is not known if he made the move south from Tennessee with the slave owner or was bought later.  Was Ben purchased in Virginia and separated from his family when he was moved to Texas? Why did the master move from Tennessee to Texas? Was it just about the land? or, was it the desire of the master to move deeper south to secure his slaves.

What we do know is that in 1867, Ben registered to vote and recorded that he owned property–a brave and proud moment, but not without risk.

I know my next step—tracing the slave master. Slaves were property and as such had to be dealt with through the courts upon the slave owner’s death which occurred in 1858. If extant, the probate records will help. Also, it is possible that the plantation papers, the day to day working papers of the plantation, are available.

I have much to learn, but willing researchers attending the conference helped me take those first steps to learn more. And yes, I will continue the journey. I need to know more about plantation papers[2] and Freedman’s Bureau [3], and, about the records contained within the Historic Black Colleges and Universities[4]. (Many more were presented but these were some of the best.

At a minimum, for those of you who are “on the clock” consider attending a session at a conference or provided by your society which is other than the ethnic groups you primarily research. It is great fun to be a “beginner” again.

Happy Hunting!


What I have done since the last posting: worked on the BCG website, “played” President of the Seattle Genealogical Society (agenda, committee, reports, etc.) wrote briefing paper on online class for BCG who is very interested in the model.

[1] Name is changed.
[2] Andi Cumbo-Floyd, “The Wild Terrain of Plantation Papers for Research on Enclaved People,” Ohio Genealogical Society 2017 Conference, 29 April 2017.
[3] J. Mark Lowe, “Finding Former Slaves and Freedman Marriage Records,” Ohio Genealogical Society 2017 Conference, 29 April 2017.
[4] Deborah Abbot, “Researching Libraries and Archives of Historical Black Colleges,” Ohio Genealogical Society 2017 Conference, 28 April 2017.

I don’t do Research Logs…

IL court minutes 2016In fact, I really dislike keeping track of what I look at.  But, in my defense, I do keep a research log, but I do them differently.  I am far more successful and consistent in my record keeping if I combine the following three items into single document:

  • my research plan
  • my research log
  • my findings

But, those of you who looked at my research plan from the two posts know that the research plan, log and the findings morphed into a single report seamlessly. Each section is important but the report should be considered “organic,” i.e. it will change and grow as you research and analyze your data.

I found myself working in this manner while I was on my second road trip last summer. The three bullets melted together. The final write-up was a separate document.

Step 1: Develop the research plan. I would start by figuring out where I would be in the next few days — usually more than one respository–and develop a research plan for each. Each could be a separate Word doc. At that time, I would draft a citations using EE consisting of as much information as I could gather from the website for the items I wanted.

Step 2: Research. When I was at the repository, I would follow the research plan, and if the item was found, color the research plan draft citation green, copy the draft citation over to section called Findings. I would then complete the citation, do the research, and record the findings. (Of course, it was never that smooth, but you get the idea.)

Step 3: Negative Search. If I did not find the item, I would leave the font black on the draft citation for the research plan and cut and paste the draft citation into a section called “Negative Searches.” I would add notes indicating why it was no longer available, complete the citation, and add notes.

Step 4: Negative Findings. If I found the item, but it didn’t contain information relevant to the research question, I would cut and paste the draft citation into the section “Negative Findings.”  Again, I would add notes if it was appropriate and complete the citation, noting particularly the range of my review.

Step 5. New Discoveries. If I discovered some sources that I had not previously identified, I would either enter the draft citation into the research plan and proceed with what I was doing, or put the draft citation in the Findings section and make the notes/transcription as appropriate. [Note: these might be recommendations from the Archivist, for example.]

At this point in the report there are four sections: the Research Plan, Findings, Negative Searches (didn’t find the document at all) and Negative Findings (found the document but nothing relavant).

I had a lot of deeds to gather in one respository as both my grandfather and my great grandfather bought and sold land for a living. This created a situation where there were many deeds in a single index. This changed my pattern of onsite researching a little.

When I was gathering deeds at a particular location, I still did a citation template. I first recorded all the deeds that I wanted from that index, carefully recording the grantor/grantee, brief abstract of property, and volume and page number of each.  As I photographed each original deed, I changed the index notation from black font color to green, the “code” indicating that I had taken the photo.  There were some deeds I purposefully decided not to copy, and I colored the index notation red.  I made sure I had all the information necessary for a complete citation and moved to the next deed. If I didn’t find the deed/document (rare) I left it black.

Some documents I transcribed while I was on site but that was a rare occurrence. For example, the county clerks do not want you photographing vital records. Where I was restricted from taking the photo, I transcribed the document. [Research hint: when BMDs are recorded at the local and the state level, get them both. You never know what additional information you will find.]

While there are many classes in how to develop research plans, and research logs and writing reports, all with elaborate spreadsheets, it always seemed like too much work. No spreadsheet, no matter how elaborate, can get me to enter everything I research as well as the system I have noted above. I think my method–for me–results in a more integrated report. All the information from a single repository is in a single place.

The next step is to write the report, but you now have all the information gathered together in a single spot. Congratulations.

Happy Hunting!


What I have done since the last posting: I am deeply trying to learn DNA analysis and attempting to solve a problem on my hubby’s mother’s side of the family.  I have also volunteered to assist in updating the content in the BCG website. There is a whole team of folks doing this….a herculean effort.

Certification Discussion Groups 2 & 3

Due to the overwhelming success of the “beta test,” I am getting ready to start the next Certification Discussion Groups, sponsored by the Seattle Genealogical Society. You may remember that about 4 months ago, I did a call out for individuals considering certification with the Board for Certification of Genealogists(R). I then conducted an online, 7-part series based on this blog and my experiences on the application process, the 7 elements and the aftermath.

I plan on conducting one or two of these again in the late summer early fall. The evaluations of the “beta” were extremely strong. I also appreciated the input as to where the program could be improved.

If you are interested in being considered in the next series of groups, you should drop me an email (jkmorelli@gmail.com) and ask to be put on the list. The priority is SGS members, WA residents, then everyone else in order of receipt. There is no charge to sign up, nor is there any commitment to agree to be a member. Date and times have not been set. Once the class is “built,” there will be a fee assessed to non-SGS participants, so please let me know if you are a member or a resident of WA.

Happy Hunting!


Strategy: Conference Session Selections

2017-04-28 16.15.27The Ohio Genealogical Society Conference for 2017 was a wonderful learning experience for me and I hope for the eager learners I had in my classes. But, if you have ever attended a multi-day conference you know that they give you so many choices for a single time slot that to pick the few that you attend is a challenge.

Here are a few of the ways I decide on one session over another. I choose my sessions in this priority rank. The presentations where:

  1. I am the speaker! 🙂 It’s kinda “mandatory.”
  2. the topic is one I need to know more about for my own research or for that of a client
  3. the presentation is given by a really knowledgable and skilled speaker. They are always worth listening to, even if you have heard him/her before. I especially gravitate towards those who teach intermediate to advanced skills
  4. a new speaker or a new topic is being presented. These are just for fun!

At this conference I did a little of all four.

Group 1: to teach others

I gave three talks and I showed up for all three!  [I heard at least one presenter did not show for his workshop. That is my new nightmare.]

Group 2: to learn something new
Ohio GS had a very nice collection of African American presentations and I attended as many as I could. In addition, there were a few other presentations that were germane as well.

  • “Researching African Americans in the Wake of the Civil War,” a Case Study by Weyonneda Minis
    This was a good overview of records that relate to the African American experience. More importantly, I had a wonderful conversation after the presentation with the speaker and two other attendees.
  • “Researching Libraries and Archives of Historical Black Colleges & Universities” by Deborah Abbott
    I was very interested in knowing what types of collections they might have and how those may differ from other predominantly white institutions. This could have been under Group 4 as I have not heard her speak before. At the end of the conference we had dinner together.
  • “The Wild Terrain of Plantation Papers for Research on Enslaved People” by Andi Combs-Floyd
    I was unaware of this rich resource for the enslaved and the owner. Later, Ari Wilkins helped me find out where to access the records and our own UW Library has the set of microfilms and index! Field Trip! Andi wrote a book about her experience and I will review it here after I have read it.
  • “My Father’s War: WW II Research” by Gagel
    In July, I will attend Gen-Fed, a week-long institute focusing only on the records held at the National Archives in Washington DC. I thought attending this session might help me as I prepare for that institute and in finding my father’s Office of the Secret Service records.
  • “Urban Research: Finding City-Dwelling Ancestors in Ohio and Beyond,” by Sonny Morton
    I know nothing about urban research because all of my ancestors were farmers or residents of very small towns in the Midwest. The resources discussed were ones I was already familiar with. I recognize that in some ways that was reassuring.
  • “Did Great-Grandmother Really Disappear Without a Trace? Using State Asylum Records”
    Wevonneda Minis focused primarily on the 1900s, an era I only cover superficially in my talk about “Finding Dirk: Insanity in the 19th century.” She did however, mention the presence of Civil War soldiers in asylums and is going to send me her link to where she read about that.
  • “Finding Former Slaves and Freedman Marriage Records,” J. Mark Lowe. My biggest “takeaway” was that the individuals from different states invested in the Freedman’s Bank with differing levels of participation and it is important to know if you are trying to find something that will not be in the record.

Group 3: to learn new speaking techniques from a solid presenter

  • “The Gone, the Missing and the Misindexed: Finding Lost Families,” by J. Mark Lowe.
    Mark is a consummate story teller. I love how he weaves the story into what could be a dry topic—indexing challenges. I tell somewhat of a story, but the integration is lacking. Mark is a master.
  • “Focusing on Pathways across the Arkansas Territory,” by J. Mark Lowe
    This presentation could also have fallen into Group 2 above as Mark focused on the middle south and the colonial to the 1850s, an area and an era I rarely research.
  • “He Used to Be My Ancestor: Seven Common Research Mistakes” by Chris Staats (that’s Chris in the photo above)
    Chris shared seven research mistakes that he has made with “wonderful” examples. The last mistake was research bias: he discovered, and had to tell his mother that her father was not her biological father. Chris then proceeded to identify his grandfather using DNA. As he said, “Overnight one-fourth of my family tree was lopped off.” I had never heard Chris speak before.

Group 4: to listen to a speaker about whom I know nothing

  • “Trolling the Virtual Cemeteries and Using Cemetery Records,” by Amie Tennant
    I wouldn’t have normally stopped in to hear about FindAGrave, and BillionGraves, but I had never heard Amie speak. She and Sonny Morton (“Urban Research”, above) have similar presentation styles—very personable and approachable, peppy and bouncy.
  • “Introduction to Tracing your Roots in Eastern Europe” by Amie Wachs (This also could have been in Group 2, as one line of my husband’s family (Frisch) comes from the Czech Republic, just south of Prague.) Again this is a topic I know very little about and a speaker I only knew by reputation. Amie is a solid presenter who moves through her slide transitions easily.

I love conferences! They provide the opportunity to teach, and the opportunity to learn. And, an opportunity to expand my Genea-buddies around the entire US. I certainly did all of these this past week! So, “hat’s off” to the many volunteers and the speakers involved in the conference. It takes many to put on a large regional conference like this. They all were friendly and helpful. And, thanks for inviting me.

Happy Hunting!


What I have done since the last blog: I hadn’t realized it had been so long since the last blog posting. I certainly hope in the coming months I can improve my frequency. I like to post about once a week. Since the last blog…or thereabouts, I have been working on presentations for Federation of Genealogical Societies—two new ones, and applying for conferences in 2018, including Jamboree, Florida Virtual and National Genealogical Society. The latter will be held in Grand Rapids and I have cousins and an archive that I want to see there (my fingers are crossed on that one!). This month the OGS proposals are due for the next conference in 2018 and I will submit for that as well. May is slow–may make a trip to CO to write!

Step-by-Step: My Intractable Problem

nose in bookA dose of my own medicine! On 12 February I blogged about steps to solve problems using a research plan. But, I think an example is so much better to illustrate the value of compiling our work, especially when we are trying to solve our intractable genealogical problems. This post outlines, step-by-step, how I built a research plan using the methodology outlined in the blog post “Strategic Thinking: A Research Plan.”

I admit I have done much research on my Friedrich Eilers (FE), some of it targeted and some of it “grazing.” This is my attempt to formalize the output, focus on the process and give my some research discipline.

As we know the Genealogical Proof Standard exhorts us to do reasonably exhaustive “REsearch,” not exhaustive “search.” The implication is, of course, that “researching” is far more disciplined and expects the genealogist to select the record sets that are most likely to provide the needed information.

I am seeking to identify Friedrich Eilers, who was the groom in the second marriage to my great-grandmother Eda/Ida (van Hoorn) Berg in October of 1861 and who after November 1862 was never referred to again in any known document in connection with my family.

I have taken the steps from the previous post and sequentially attached the report as I built it-step-by-step.  To make it easier for you to see what I added, I have changed the type face to red for the items that apply to that particular step of this methodology and which have been added after the previous document. Let’s see how it works.

Phase 1: Recording all you know.

1. Start fresh. Act (and think) like you have never seen this problem before.
comment: I took a yoga class and focused on “dispassionate observation.” It works for me.
document: be-rp-1

2. Clearly state your research question and write it down. Make your individual of interest unique in the world using the “known facts of the case.” Write your question at the top of a blank document. Make it 14 pt. font and bold.
comment: I make research questions very specific in the description of the individual. Keep in mind that identity comes before relationships. If I want to know the parents of X, I first have to clarify the identity of X. Therefore, I usually start with “Identify X who did so-and-so and such-and-such.” I don’t think I make great research questions, so you are on your own here.
document: be-rp-2

3. Gather together every shred of evidence that you already have that relates to the individual or his/her relatives, business associates etc.
comment: I don’t have much, but I was surprised at how many documents I needed to get the timeline filled with the pertinent sources.
documents: I did this concurrently with no. 4 below.

4. Document by document, write what you know, based on what you have. Start with the citation and then summarize what is contained within the source. Transcribe and abstract any documents with handwriting. If your document is a census, record the neighbors of at least 10 families in each direction. Label this section “Background.”
comment: I have followed Ida for years, but I looked at everything again. Notice that there is a gap between 1864 and 1871 where I have nothing.
document: be-rp-4

5. Note whether the “thing you are holding in your hand,” the source, is an original, derivative or authored work; whether the information is primary, secondary, or indeterminable; and whether the evidence is direct, indirect or negative in response to your research question. Don’t stop with just categorizing your documents. Instead, analyze the quality of your sources.  If there is a need and ability to obtain a better record, i.e. closer to the event, enter it on your Research Plan.
comment: This implies that you have a Research Plan set up already on your document. If you haven’t done so, type a heading of “Research Plan” at the bottom of your document. Record your sources you need to obtain to improve the quality of the ones you have.
document: be-rp-5

6. As you are doing no. 5 above, identify all FAN Club members and place in a table with the date of interaction and the role your ancestor played in that interaction. Label this “FAN Club.” keep the interactions in chronological order–you are building a timeline.
comment:  My FAN Club consists of people who have interacted with Ida but not with Friedrich. I have no known FAN Club members for FE, but that’s what we are trying to solve. Should I find any, that will be a huge clue.
document: be-rp-6

7. Add known dates of importance of your individual of interest to your timeline. Depending on your problem, there may be [timelines of] other key individuals (in a separate column) you wish to add to your timeline [of your person of interest].
comment:  FE gets added with the hope I can fill out more information about FE candidates as I begin to research. I didn’t make red the whole table, but you get the idea.
document: be-rp-7

8. If appropriate, take your timeline and expand it to a table, which includes all people you think might be relevant to your investigation–family, candidates for identity (for example, all your possible John Smiths), business partners, and other members of the FAN Club you developed in item 7 above. Add their events to their timeline as well.
comment: For now, without doing the actual research, I anticipate that I will have multiple candidates for FE. A German name in a German area cannot be unique.
document: be-rp-8

Phase 2: Research researching

9.  Identify the sources that are most likely to yield salient information based on what you know. Add the list to your document and label this ”Research Plan.” Each resource should include a draft of the citation. Put the citation in bold.
comment: I already had five sources I needed to obtain by the time I finished with the known information, so I reprioritzed and added to the list of five. Certainly some of these could fall off the list as I gain more information. A basic principle of research is that you start in the US, yet my biggest clue is the birthplace in Germany, Ober Gleen. That’s a bit of a conundrum.
document: be-rp-9

10. Review Part 2 of Val Greenwood’s book for a list of types of sources.  Place “likely suspects” on your research plan.
comment: I know Stephenson County pretty well and some documents just do not exist, e.g. newspapers before 1890. Greenwood lists the following: newspapers, vital records, censuses, probate records, wills, guardianships, land (local and federal), other court records, church records, military and cemetery and burial records. I believe that I have either addressed by placing on my research plan or exhausted all these more typical records. I have added a narrative at the bottom of the document for the searches in each record type so I have an explanation of why I am not pursuing those sources.  It would be better if I had these as citations. In the future, I need to move some of my past research log information over to fill this out.
document: be-rp-10

11. Read the FamilySearch wiki for your particular locality for additional resources. [2]
comment: The FS wiki is a go-to place for me for locality research. Research every jurisdictional level: country, state, county, court. If you do a lot of research in one area, consider writing a locality guide so you don’t lose all this fabulous work you are doing. consider also Cyndi’s List and Linkpendium.
document: be-rp-11

12. Conduct a locality or topical search in Family Search and Ancestry catalog (this is different than the wiki mentioned  in 11.) Click through every entry in the catalog to identify film you ought to order or if the film has been indexed or uploaded and not indexed.
comment: I have looked at the Ober Gleen Family Search catalog before, but now I see that FS has added an index! This is a very “bright shiny object” for me and I must, for now, let it go. I need to complete these other tasks before I get to points 14 and 15. Your Research Plan might be getting quite long right now.
document: be-rp-12

13. Review the National Genealogical Society (NGS) States series to determine if your state is included. These wonderful books are an overview of resources and repositories that are state specific and which include archives and repositories you may not have thought of. Record any likely repositories.
comment: Illinois has a terrific state series book but I wonder if I am over looking the surrounding states?  Stephenson County is on the border of Wisconsin; could FE have lived in WI and been visiting or doing business in Freeport for some other reason? I think I need to widen my area of focus–but that will be for another day.
document: be-rp-13

Phase 3: Researching
To this point, we have just been building (adding to) our research plan, now we start looking at some of the resources we identified.

14. Based on your research plan, conduct the research of your top priority source. If you think of a new resource to check, just add it to your research plan in priority order. Always write out a skeleton citation.
comment: The bright shiny object calls!! 
confession:  There are two approaches: I could look in census records in the US or look in the Ober Gleen birth records. The census records are hard because there is so little information–I don’t even have a birth year for Friedrich.  Assuming there are multiple FEs in Ober Gleen, I am going to work the Ober Gleen records first and fill out the table that is in landscape mode. 

15. Do your on site research. If you cannot travel, then enlist a friend or hire a genealogist in the area. Revisit your research plan and add new sources (as citations) as they are identified.
comment: And just like they show on television– I hopped on a plane and flew to Salt Lake City to meet with the German expert.  I (driving a big black SUV) found a parking place right in front of the library! No one was in the library except for THE expert on Ober Gleen records (probably Fritz Juengling!).  He already had found what i was looking for, translated it and gave me a very nice Family Group Sheet and pedigree chart scribed in lovely calligraphy–NOT! 🙂
document: be-rp-15

Findings at this point, are the following:

There is only one Friedrich Euler/Eiler who appeared in this time frame in Ober Gleen. He is my top candidate. The rest of the Fred/Fritz/etc. Eilers/Eilerts etc. just do not have the Ober Gleen connection that is so necessary for this resolution.

  1. It is not known where Friedrich Euler was born. he does not appear in the Ober Gleen birth records; however, from the point of the birth of his first child in 1842 to his emigration in 1860, Ober Gleen appeared to be his residence.
  2. Friedrich Euler and  Gertraud Schoenhals had six children, five of which were born before they married.
  3. Friedrich Euler and Gertraud Schoenhals finally married in 1855
  4. Friedrich immigrated in 1860 to Illinois. It is not known why he picked Illinois as no FAN Club member has yet been identified as living in Illinois and he appeared to travel alone.
  5. Friedrich married Eda Berg in 1861 in Stephenson County, Illinois.
  6. Gertraud and the children emigrated in August/September of 1862.
  7. Eda used the Eyler surname in November of 1862 and then never used it again.
  8. In 1872, son John (Johannes, b. 1848) married Rosina Hoffman in Stephenson County, firmly placing at least one family member in the county.
  9. There is no divorce noted in Stephenson County for FE and IB.

16. Order those FHL films you identified in your catalog review or better yet, take a trip to Salt Lake City and do your research there in the company of research experts who can help.
comment: I am going to quit now. I have other things to do, but I have made real progress on this “intractable problem.” There are many things yet to research before any conclusions can be drawn, but I have built a great summary document to build upon in the future.

17. Re-conduct old research. We are smarter now then we were five years ago.
comment: When I was a baby genealogist I was told to “really study your sources so you got all the information from them.” What people didn’t tell me is that it didn’t matter how good I thought I was THEN, I am better now and you probably do have to re-review your sources, especially those related to your tough problems.

18. Check the family trees in Family Search and Ancestry. Yes, I know they are rift with errors and are usually undocumented, but they can offer clues and should be used.
comment: In looking at the trees, no one identified that Friedrich and Gertraud emigrated.  They recognize that Johannes and Heinrich did, but no one connects the passenger lists of the family or Friedrich. So the trees, for this study did not provide any clues i could build on.  

19. Record ALL searches, including those that yield nothing. Constantly update your research plan. Record all your findings including your negative searches. Label these Negative Findings.
comment: This is the part that can really help you, should you have to put the research down to do other things–like laundry.  I am not satisfied with how the research paper ends…it is rather messy and needs some work to gather the information together in a more coherent form. But, that, too, is for another day.

20. Repeat.

What you have now, even if you did not solve your problem is a document which:

  1. Documents your  known information
  2. Identifies gaps in your existing sources
  3. Sets you up for the analysis of your documents
  4. Serves as a summary of your work to date and even if you set it down, you will have this terrific record of your findings for later
  5. Records where you searched and found nothing so you won’t redo that work, unless you decide to re-energize no. 17, and
  6. Outlines your next steps

Whew! If you got to the end of this blog–congratulations!  You get the gold star.

Happy hunting!


What I have done since the last post: worked on this blog! I also conducted the second session of the online Certification Discussion Group; worked on a client report, and worked in “fits and starts” on my DNA problem.

[1] A gentleman in a presentation I gave on determining identity asked “He’s a second husband with no children, why do you even care?” My response was, “Friedrich Eilers is an itch I cannot scratch.”

[2] FamilySearch wiki: http://familysearch.org/wiki.


I wasn’t expecting this!

fireworksI received notification in January that Board for Certification of Genealogists(R)  conferred the credential of Certified Genealogist(R) based on the submission of my work which was found to be to standards.[1] I shared my good news with many of my genealogy friends at SLIG and with the readers of this blog.  Very exciting. Very cool.

I came home and proceeded to work diligently on projects that had piled up while I was working on my portfolio.  Good.

About a week ago, I realized my thinking had changed. Two thoughts were now pounding in my head:

  1. I am only an incremently  better a genealogist today WITH the credential, than I was the day before I received my notification.
  2. I  now feel the responsibility to live up to the expectations of the judges of BCG and of other credential genealogists.

The first thought demands that I continue to educate myself and keep current with standards and knowledge in our field, which is rapidly changing. The second directs me to strive to improve my work product and my relationships with client, colleagues and others, so I am worthy of the trust placed in me by BCG and the judges in the conferring of the CG credential.

These two concepts hit me the other day, so…

I pledge, to myself, that I will strive to “Search | Learn | Teach,”
to the very highest of standards that I can attain. [2]

NOW, I “get it.”

Happy Hunting!


What I have done since the last post: worked on a couple client reports, kept up with my bullet journaling, worked with my DNA kits and watched the videos about Genome Match Pro (next goal–download GMP onto my Mac); I also moved all my data over to FTDNA when they opened up their new sharing feature. Attended a presentation by Janice Lovelace about “Finding your Slaveholder” and listened to Karen Stanbary give a great talk on incorporating DNA into your proof arguments, a BCG webinar.

[1] Certified Genealogist is a registered trademark and the designation CG is a service mark of the Board for Certification of Genealogists®, used under license by Board certificants who meet competency standards.

[2] “Search | Learn | Teach” is my business motto which embodies the principles of sound research, continuing education and sharing knowledge with others.